DAVIS
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The District Court granted the Commissioner of Social Security's unopposed motion to remand a Social Security benefits denial case for reconsideration of the plaintiff's residual functional capacity and prior administrative findings, with an opportunity for a hearing.
The court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion to remand. The decision denying benefits was reversed and the case was remanded pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings, including reevaluation of residual functional capacity and administrative findings with an opportunity for hearing.
[1] A federal court may reverse and remand a social security case for rehearing pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. …
[2] A district court may grant an unopposed motion for entry of judgment with remand in a social security case.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the Court has the power to enter judgment, reversing and remanding a social security case for rehearing.”
Establishes the court's statutory authority to reverse and remand Social Security cases.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDavis sought Social Security benefits but was denied. The Commissioner subsequently moved for remand to reconsider findings at the sequential evaluati…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Before the Court is the Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand. (Doc. 18). The Commissioner believes that remand is appropriate to accomplish the following: [R]econsider findings at the relevant steps of the sequential evaluation process, including but not limited to a reevaluation of the Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity and the prior administrative findings. The Plaintiff will also be offered an opportunity for a hearing.
(Doc. 18). This Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand is unopposed. Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the Court has the power to enter judgment, reversing and remanding a social security case for rehearing. See also Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-98 (1993); Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 101-02 (1991). The Commissioner’s request for remand will be granted. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. The Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (Doc. 18) is GRANTED. 2. The decision denying benefits is REVERSED and this case is REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g¢) for further proceedings. 3. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment, terminate all deadlines, deny all pending motions as moot, and close the file. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on April 11, 2024.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1993)
- Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89 (U.S. 1991)